@ Nick....I've made numerous posts today, asking you a question. You have made 6 posts after my first one, yet fail to answer, why? You are usually "On my posts instantly"....I'll ask the question once more.....Have you, or do you, watch Solihull Barons(Blaze) at the Sky Dome?
I'm still confused as to what this 'partnership with Wasps' is supposed to be.
Even assuming SISU had a change of heart and wanted to buy into ACL, is there any evidence anywhere that Wasps would want to sell?
Edit: Just on the cost of land - the suggestion is upwards of £100,000 per acre for green-belt, and a lot more (c. £650,000) for stuff with permission for houses. Let's say the club can get something for £200k/acre, and are looking at 25 acres (equivalent to Brandon), that would be more like £5m for the land. I think. Still has to be £20m at least for the stadium complete though, I'd agree - and it's going to be smaller, obviously.
Mr Fisher said the club had options to buy two sites in the Coventry area. One, Brandon speedway stadium, has hit setbacks. Problems include complex ownership involving HMRC, and planning issues.
He said 60 acres was needed for training and academy facilities next to a £20million stadium which could begin at 12-15,000 capacity, and expand to 23,000, with planning permission potentially taking “18 months”.
Minutes of the Stadium Forum Committee, 21st January 2015TF was asked whether the club could buy 50% of the Ricoh. TF said that it is unlikely that
a deal can be done re a share of the ownership of the Stadium with Wasps. TF
confirmed that the club’s owners and Directors are not prepared to take on the risk of
financial liability for half of the £14 million loan. TF has analysed the financial risk of the
loan which is a sub-investment grade loan – meaning the loan is financially speculative
and having a high risk of default. TF will not expose the club to the risk of going into
another administration by being joint and severally liable on the £14 million loan.
The loan, the loan, the loan - this entire fiasco and the destruction of our club has always been about the f***ing loan hasn’t it?
Instead of assumptions use facts please. End of the day sisu didn't wanna buy the Ricoh or even part, fisher admits that. Wasps wanted to buy and stumped the cash. Sisu have fucked us up by using the Ricoh as a bargaining tool and lost. They tried to put pressure on ACL and it backfired. But hurt the long term future of our club. Only hopeful outcome is wasps buying out sisu. Would you welcome that move?
Fair enough, I've taken the 25 acres from the SCG minutes, which I thought implied that they could build just a stadium in the smaller area. They considered 24 acres at Brandon, and 23 at Ryton, according to Fisher.
The subsequent sale process saw Prologis successfully close the land deal with a bid of £650,000 per acre.
• The price of land ranges from £100,000 per acre for Greenbelt to £350,000-£400,000 being the current market value for Commercial use.
£350,000 is the cheapest we will get as it is for commercial use.
I'm still confused as to what this 'partnership with Wasps' is supposed to be.
Even assuming SISU had a change of heart and wanted to buy into ACL, is there any evidence anywhere that Wasps would want to sell?
Edit: Just on the cost of land - the suggestion is upwards of £100,000 per acre for green-belt, and a lot more (c. £650,000) for stuff with permission for houses. Let's say the club can get something for £200k/acre, and are looking at 25 acres (equivalent to Brandon), that would be more like £5m for the land. I think. Still has to be £20m at least for the stadium complete though, I'd agree - and it's going to be smaller, obviously.
Let's use facts then, I'm up for that. In fairness, I asked first, where's the evidence that Wasps would sell part of ACL to SISU?
As for SISU not wanting to buy into the Ricoh - fair enough, it looks like Fisher has admitted that they didn't want to, at least on those terms. That seems odd to me, because from where I'm standing I think Wasps got a very good deal. As much as SISU have hurt the club, it's the council who decided to make that deal with Wasps, let's remember, instead of giving time to rebuild bridges or enter into any kind of negotiation with the club - that too, is a fact.
So, would I want Wasps as owners instead of SISU? Good question, although again it's actually a big assumption that they'd want to buy.
In truth it's hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job than SISU, but these are people who have ripped their club eighty miles away from their fanbase - they wouldn't give a fuck about the club any more than SISU do. They bought into a league position with Wasps, and then moved the club lock, stock and barrel to Coventry when it suited them to do so. I don't see these people as being investors in the club any more than SISU are. I'm not sure that I'd want either of them as owners.
this pretty much catagorically shows that their "bid" for half the Ricoh was just done to turn people against the council/acl and they knew it wasn't good enough to be accepted and didn't want it to be.
To me it also shows without a doubt in my mind that they have no intention of building a stadium, if taking half of a 14m loan is too big a risk, building a stadium is a complete non starter.
Come on duffer. Sisu have had 7 fucking years to buy the Ricoh or even a chunk. They started to play silly buggers and get the ground on the cheap. In fact for free by distressing ACL and moving the club to Northampton. During that time they officially said they would NEVER play at the Ricoh again and will start building a new ground. True yes? So during that time, ACL had an empty ground. Wasps seen an opportunity and enquired while ccfc were playing in Northampton. True yes? So sisu's childish games fucked any chance of us owning the ricoh. All the above are facts. No-one knows whether wasps would be good owners or not but one thing is for sure, they couldn't do a worse job then sisu. That my friend is all facts.
Green belt is green belt.
If you could just buy green belt and build on it everybody would be doing it.
There is a demand for land for housing so Sisu would be bidding against the more profitable housebuilders.
In addition if there is a hint of green belt changes builders will just take an option on the land with an option to buy it.
It suits them but CCFC want it now so they can get started.
Mate, I'm not denying that SISU screwed up hugely in the initial negotiation before the rent strike and subsequently in taking the club away. But it's also clear to me that on the return to the Ricoh the council didn't even give a chance to rebuilding trust, they sold out to Wasps instead. That is completely indisputable, if you want to talk facts.
The other fact is that Wasps owners have treated their club as a franchise. I find that utterly immoral and on that basis alone I'd be reluctant to put these people in charge of our club. What's the point in trading one set of shits for another set?
Brighton built a stadium not just on green belt, but by an Area of Outstanding National Beauty. I'm not saying that that's right, but it can be done.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falmer_Stadium
Fair enough, I've taken the 25 acres from the SCG minutes, which I thought implied that they could build just a stadium in the smaller area. They considered 24 acres at Brandon, and 23 at Ryton, according to Fisher.
I apologize for attempting to bring back the original post:
How many know what a 'sub-investment grade loan' is?
I had to look it up.
It's a loan given to creditor with a poor credit rating given by one or more agency's like Standard & Poor.
It's not really surprising that ACL has a poor credit rating given their latest accounts and their cash-flow problems the past year.
Sisu, being experts in loans are of course well aware of the financial situation in ACL and I believe they now sit back and monitor how ACL/Wasps will be doing the next couple of years. At present I fully understand why they do not want to get into part ownership of ACL.
CCFC is merely sustainable enough to be a mid-table league 1 club. Wasps is suffering heavy losses every year. ACL may just make a small profit with new sponsor agreements and two sports businesses there.
Will all three make a combined profit going forward? I am not so sure, and I think it's questionable if any profit will leave enough for both Wasps and ccfc to make significant investments.
One thing that strikes me is that there seem to be quite a few people who want Wasps to take over the club and at the same time they do not attend ccfc matches at the Ricoh. This is odd because ACL/Wasps need all the revenue they can get to become a profitable business ... and subsequently have the potential to buy out sisu.
NOPM not only hurts the club, it also hurts ACL.QUOTE=Godiva;853776]
Godiva, ACL has suffered 1 year of losses at about 400K and further Mr Fisher's comment do not stack up with the judicial review that stated , when ccc attempted to purchase the loan for 12m that "Therefore, despite the valuations of ACL’s interest in the Arena, the Bank continued to have confidence in ACL’s ability to service the full £15.5m loan on commercialterms, with repayments of £1.3m per year. "
in the JR review the Judge declared CCFC as balance sheet insolvent, based upon poor management. Please square that circle rather than hang on one of mr Fisher's many throw away lines.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
- SISU are acommercial organisation, committed (and entitled) to pursue their own commercialinterests. Until April 2012, ACL had been profitable: its balance sheet showed aprofit every year (see paragraph 13 above). On the other hand, the SISU companyCCFC had incurred substantial losses – regular losses of £4m-6m per year including,in 2011-12, a £5m loss on a turnover of £10m – and was clearly balance sheetinsolvent. It appears to be common ground that poor management greatly contributedto these commercial problems of CCFC. SISU invested about £40m in CCFC until2012, and, as I understand it, another approximately £10m from April 2012 untilCCFC’s demise.
I apologize for attempting to bring back the original post:
How many know what a 'sub-investment grade loan' is?
I had to look it up.
It's a loan given to creditor with a poor credit rating given by one or more agency's like Standard & Poor.
It's not really surprising that ACL has a poor credit rating given their latest accounts and their cash-flow problems the past year.
Sisu, being experts in loans are of course well aware of the financial situation in ACL and I believe they now sit back and monitor how ACL/Wasps will be doing the next couple of years. At present I fully understand why they do not want to get into part ownership of ACL.
CCFC is merely sustainable enough to be a mid-table league 1 club. Wasps is suffering heavy losses every year. ACL may just make a small profit with new sponsor agreements and two sports businesses there.
Will all three make a combined profit going forward? I am not so sure, and I think it's questionable if any profit will leave enough for both Wasps and ccfc to make significant investments.
One thing that strikes me is that there seem to be quite a few people who want Wasps to take over the club and at the same time they do not attend ccfc matches at the Ricoh. This is odd because ACL/Wasps need all the revenue they can get to become a profitable business ... and subsequently have the potential to buy out sisu.
NOPM not only hurts the club, it also hurts ACL.
Fair enough, I've taken the 25 acres from the SCG minutes, which I thought implied that they could build just a stadium in the smaller area. They considered 24 acres at Brandon, and 23 at Ryton, according to Fisher.
Unless we're looking to buy land without planning permission for commercial use, and then try to push it through. Given SISU's apparent love of taking councils on, I wouldn't put this approach past them. If you promise enough jobs, it seems that you've got a chance of getting anything through. Just to be clear I'm not trying to make SISU's case for them here, but I think we need to make clear our assumptions. 60 acres at £350k is £21m, agreed - but 24 acres at less costs less. If they are really going to do it, they're going build it on the cheap, obviously.
I apologize for attempting to bring back the original post:
How many know what a 'sub-investment grade loan' is?
I had to look it up.
It's a loan given to creditor with a poor credit rating given by one or more agency's like Standard & Poor.
It's not really surprising that ACL has a poor credit rating given their latest accounts and their cash-flow problems the past year.
Sisu, being experts in loans are of course well aware of the financial situation in ACL and I believe they now sit back and monitor how ACL/Wasps will be doing the next couple of years. At present I fully understand why they do not want to get into part ownership of ACL.
What credit ratings do the OTIUM group of companies have?
What credit ratings do the OTIUM group of companies have?
Per Experian both Otium and Sky Blue Sport & Leisure have a risk rating of Maximum, and a score out of 100 (100 being the best) of 15, the suggested credit limit is £0.
For ACL, the risk is Low, a score of 87, and a credit limit of £220k.
Wasps ?
they appear to be ok.....well, they've certainly started to "borrow" a lot of fans......:wave:
Per Experian both Otium and Sky Blue Sport & Leisure have a risk rating of Maximum, and a score out of 100 (100 being the best) of 15, the suggested credit limit is £0.
For ACL, the risk is Low, a score of 87, and a credit limit of £220k.
Wasps ?
Duffer that's the issue here. Trust. Council don't trust them (rightly so) I don't trust them. They had too many chances to get things right and time and time again fucked up. How many more chances did they want? And moving the club to Northampton was the final straw for me. Could never trust them again after that. As for wasps. Are they in a stronger position now compared to 12 months? I reckon so. Not excusing it because ethically it's wrong. But least the owner looks to make a go of things unlike our owners
That credit limit also takes into account the fact that ACL already owe 14mill. Not really sure how much value you would place in Exerians thoughts but they obviously think it's still fine to loan to ACL despite the fact they already have a very large loan. Experian clearly have it right with Otium though, it's not a good idea to give them credit even just for a few albums to sell in the club shop.
I know what you mean.
I have found the two statements conflicting to be honest. If its the smaller development then I don't think that would include all the commercial developments that I thought SISU were suggested would partly finance the deal hotels, supermarkets etc. Also we would then need to fund a desperate training facility/academy.
But personally I think best case scenario you are looking at 350k an acre and I just don't see it as affordable whichever way you look at it. I genuinely do think it will be a case of rent at the Ricoh with costs as low as possible. Continue fruitlessly trying to sue the council. Hoping for compensation and at the same time watch Wasps to see what opportunities present themselves. Unfortunately I think they will wait till wasps are distressed rather than try and sort something mutually beneficial out now.
Personally I think after a few years it will finally become evident wasps are going to collapse and it will all come to a head.
What an a**e reply! You know exactly what Noggin is saying but try to twist his words. Something I expect Grendel to do, not you!!!Ps Noggin, Experian don't lend money to anybody
Ps Noggin, Experian don't lend money to anybody
That makes zero sense. Bobbing along for a few years there will be no club they are already down to around 6000. Next year will undoubtedly be less unless something changes. So, in a few years time they could probably share with Leamington. Good luck getting a return on investment at that point.'Conficting' is a tremendously polite way of putting it. Who could blame anyone for thinking that it's flat out bullshit!
I think they're actually serious about building a new stadium - but like everyone else I can't really see how it adds up. I also think it's entirely possible that they are happy to bobble this along very slowly whilst hoping to get something from the courts and/or for Wasps to go pop. I think on that basis in some ways it might actually make some sense to buy a contentious site on the cheap, delays don't really seem to bother them, and it's going to take years for either Wasps to fail or the courtroom path to be completely exhausted. Not very good for us as fans though....
That makes zero sense. Bobbing along for a few years there will be no club they are already down to around 6000. Next year will undoubtedly be less unless something changes. So, in a few years time they could probably share with Leamington. Good luck getting a return on investment at that point.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?